Principal Investigator(s):Northwest Area Foundation; University of Oregon. Oregon Survey Research Laboratory

Summary:

The purpose of the study was to gather information
pertinent to community, neighborhood, local government, and
community-based activities in order to find ways to reduce poverty
throughout the Northwestern states of Idaho, Iowa, Minnesota, Montana,
Oregon, North Dakota, South Dakota, and Washington. The survey first
asked the respondents to name their place of residence (in terms of
state, county, and town), how long they had lived at their residence,
and how much longer they planned to r... (more info)

The purpose of the study was to gather information
pertinent to community, neighborhood, local government, and
community-based activities in order to find ways to reduce poverty
throughout the Northwestern states of Idaho, Iowa, Minnesota, Montana,
Oregon, North Dakota, South Dakota, and Washington. The survey first
asked the respondents to name their place of residence (in terms of
state, county, and town), how long they had lived at their residence,
and how much longer they planned to reside there. Then a sequence of
questions asked respondents for their thoughts about the community,
such as how they felt about it, whether they felt they belonged,
whether they were fairly treated or excluded from the community, and
how safe they felt walking around their community at night. They were
also asked about the attitudes of individuals and the relationships
between community members. The survey further asked about community
involvement, group membership, and social participation, access to
outside sources for problem-solving, and how well the members
cooperated with one another (in groups and in neighborhoods) when they
disagreed. The questionnaire also asked respondents to assess how well
people of different ethnic groups interacted with the community as a
whole and within groups, organizations, and activities. It asked for
respondents' assessment of government services for the community,
their trust in government as well as members and leaders of local
groups (business, ethnic, and religious), and the cooperation of the
community in emergencies. Respondents were asked to evaluate their
ability to make a positive impact in their community and the ability
of people and groups to provide assistance to the poverty-stricken and
to reduce the number of those in poverty. Moreover, the survey asked
respondents about the presence of leadership programs in their
community and the effects, if any, they had on its members. Switching
the focus, respondents were asked to evaluate their personal or
financial status, their ability to acquire a loan, credit, or other
financial services, and if they ever had difficulty paying for living
costs (food, housing, electricity, heating, telephone, or health
care). They were also asked to estimate how many people in the
community could not afford the basic living costs. Questions were
asked of respondents about their interest in staying informed about
public affairs, how often they accessed information in newspapers, how
often they voted in elections, the frequency in which young people
left town in search of better opportunities, and about the possibility
of implementing and developing small/local businesses within the
community. Finally, the survey collected general demographic
information including marital status, age, gender, race, education,
religion and religious affiliation, employment status, location of
residence (state, county, and town), whether they own or rent their
home, household composition, current assets and income, and their
access to telephones and the Internet.

To protect respondent privacy, certain geographic and
demographic variables are restricted from general dissemination. Users interested in obtaining these data must complete an Agreement for the Use of Confidential Data, specify the reasons for the request, and obtain IRB approval or notice of exemption for their research. Apply for access to these data through the ICPSR Restricted Data Contract Portal, which can be accessed via the study home page.

Study Description

Citation

Northwest Area Foundation, and University of Oregon. Oregon Survey Research Laboratory. Northwest Area Foundation Horizons Social Indicators Survey, 2004-2005. ICPSR21181-v1. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor], 2008-05-21. http://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR21181.v1

Universe:
Adults aged 18 and older living in 36 Horizon communities
(selected by the Northwest Area Foundation) in the Northwestern region
of the United States in the following states: Idaho, Iowa, Minnesota,
Montana, North Dakota, Oregon, South Dakota, and Washington.

Data Types:
survey data

Data Collection Notes:

(1) More information about the Northwest Area
Foundation can be found online at http://www.nwaf.org/. (2) The
following variables are only available in the restricted-use version
of the collection: LEAD7, AGE, RACEFUL, RELIG1AF, RELIG1B, RELIG1BF,
EMPLOY2F, ENDING5, INTOBS, INTOBS2, FIPS, and TRIBE2. (3) Responses to
open-ended questions can be found in the Open-End PDF file. (4) Two
different collection modes were used: computer-assisted telephone
interview (CATI) survey and supplemental mail-back survey. Although
the data collection instruments are not exactly the same, they share
many questions and response categories. Please note that much of the
data corresponds more closely to the wording of questions and response
categories in the CATI instrument. (5) Excel charts are being provided
by the data producer for further reference. (6) In the mail-back
questionnaire, the "NO OPINION" responses were recoded as "DON'T KNOW"
in the final dataset. (7) Respondents coded 1 'YES, LIVE IN COMMUNITY'
and 2 'NO -- DON'T LIVE IN COMMUNITY, BUT CLOSE ENOUGH' for variable
QAL11 (CENTRAL WASHINGTON CLUSTER SCREENER) are also coded as 11
'Q11=WA East' for the variable QUOTAVAR (Horizons Cluster). Please
note that the Final Report has this cluster labeled as "Washington
East," and the Cluster Reports have it labeled as "Central
Washington." (8) PHONE2, URB_RUR2, SCREEN1, and SCREEN3 are in the
NWAF codebook but are not present in the dataset. (9) QUOTAVAR: This
variable appears to have a discrepancy in the total number of
respondents for the Western Washington cluster for which there is no
clear explanation. (10) The skip patterns have been checked for
consistency by ICPSR, however there are several cases that were
allowed to respond to questions they should have skipped. Please refer
to #21 of the processing notes in the ICPSR codebook for further
details. (11) Some variables in the data show sysmis for which there
is no clear explanation. (12) The totals of respondents for the North
Dakota cluster in the dataset and the final report do not match. The
total of respondents in the dataset is 277, the final report shows the
total to be 274.

Methodology

Sample:
Sampling was conducted at the household level with sample
sizes in each of the 12 clusters large enough to ensure within-cluster
margins of error no higher than 5 percent. Telephone numbers were
selected randomly from each of the 36 communities, with the goal of
having the number of interviews by community within the clusters be
closely proportional to the proportions within the cluster. According
to the primary investigator, the sampling methodology for the Western
Washington supplemental mail-back survey somewhat complicates the
issues discussed in the Final Report. Please refer to the
"Methodology" and "Appendix" sections in the "Final Report" section of
the ICPSR codebook for further details.

Response Rates:
For the total telephone sample, the response rate
was 49.6 percent (measured by the accepted scientific standard set by
the Council of American Survey and Research Organizations), and the
refusal rate was 17.4 percent. Response and refusal rates vary from
community to community and cluster to cluster.

Extent of Processing: ICPSR data undergo a confidentiality review and are altered when necessary to limit the risk of
disclosure. ICPSR also routinely creates ready-to-go data files along with setups in the major
statistical software formats as well as standard codebooks to accompany the data. In addition to
these procedures, ICPSR performed the following processing steps for this data collection: